Scarlett Johansson’s Newly Engaged! Here’s a Look Back at ...
Scarlett Johansson on Her 'Incredible' Scene Partner Adam ...
How Did Scarlett Johansson Get Into Acting? IWMBuzz
Scarlett Johansson Net Worth 2020: Age, Height, Weight ...
Scarlett Johansson: Her Romantic Ups and Downs PEOPLE.com
Adoring Scarlett Johansson • Your online fan resource for ...
Scarlett Johansson Boyfriend 2020: Dating History & Exes ...
Nach zwei Jahren: Scarlett Johansson & Partner denken an ...
Scarlett Johansson Boyfriends List of Scarlett Johansson ...
Who is Scarlett Johansson dating? Scarlett Johansson ...
Scarlett Johansson, who split with husband Romain Dauriac, was previously married to Ryan Reynolds and once dated Sean Penn and Josh Harnett Scarlett Johansson on Her 'Incredible' Scene Partner, Adam Driver. Entertainment Weekly. 1:22. Adam Driver: 'Scarlett Johansson is incredibly good' ... Marriage Story's Azhy Robertson Shares Advice He Got from Adam Driver and Scarlett Johansson. People. 1:17. Marriage Story Bande-annonce Teaser - 'Ce que j'aime chez Charlie' (Comédie 2019 ... Welcome to Adoring Scarlett Johansson, an online fan resource dedicated to the talented and beautiful actress.Our aim is to provide the latest news, photos, career updates and other relevant information regarding Scarlett. We are always trying to improve the site and our aim is to make a high-quality online resource for Scarlett and her dedicated fans. Scarlett Johansson. Scarlett Johansson officially known as Scarlett Ingrid Johansson was born in 1984, 22nd November. Johansson’s place of birth was New York City in the United States. Her father and mother are Karsten Olaf Johansson and Melanie Sloan. Olaf worked as an architect while Melanie served as a producer. Nach zwei Jahren: Scarlett Johansson & Partner denken an Ehe 26. Feb. 2019, 6:59 - Jonathan B. Wagen sie schon den nächsten Schritt? Erst im November 2017 hatte Scarlett Johansson ... Scarlett Johansson’s Newly Engaged! Here’s a Look Back at Her A-List Love Life. ... When you don’t spend a lot of time with your partner you grow apart,” the source said. Scarlett Johansson was previously married to Romain Dauriac (2014 – 2017) and Ryan Reynolds (2008 – 2010). She has not been previously engaged. Scarlett Johansson has been in relationships with Kevin Yorn (2017), Joe Machota (2017), Nate Naylor (2011 – 2012), Sean Penn (2011), Josh Hartnett (2005 – 2007), Jared Leto (2004 – 2012 ... Scarlett Johansson is a member of the following lists: American film actors, American rock singers and Female rock singers. Contribute. Help us build our profile of Scarlett Johansson! Login to add information, pictures and relationships, join in discussions and get credit for your contributions. Who is Scarlett Johansson dating? Who Scarlett Johansson dated; list of Scarlett Johansson loves, ex boyfriends; breakup rumors. Fans will also enjoy these hilarious photoshopped pictures of Scarlett Johansson falling and TMI facts about Scarlett Johansson's romantic life.The loves, exes and relationships of Scarlett Johansson, listed by most recent. Scarlett Johansson was eight years old when she landed with a role in a film. Since a kid, she wished to express herself and so was interested in an acting career. She practiced acting in front of the mirror. She was studying in an institution for kids who aspire to become actors, Professional Children’s School.
My (26F) self esteem is so low that it’s ruining my life. I feel like everyone in my life is lying to me but what are the chances?
2020.03.30 15:14 madeathrowaway21My (26F) self esteem is so low that it’s ruining my life. I feel like everyone in my life is lying to me but what are the chances?
I’ll start this by saying I am getting professional help. I’m on a waiting list to start a course for CBT but it’s going to take longer due to the pandemic going on atm. I look in the mirror and I don’t think I’m ugly but when I look at pictures I get obsessed thinking I have an asymmetrical face and it’s really distracting. I have a high forehead and one side of my nose is shorter than the other, my lips aren’t symmetrical, one eyebrow is higher than the other. Everything gets me down. My housemates bully me, they know how I feel and insult me and say it’s just banter but I’ve told them I don’t find it funny. I hate that I’ve told people this is how I feel because they can use it against me. Anyway I’ve resorted to Botox and lip fillers and still nothing is helping how I view myself. I struggle with my weight and body image too but my obsession at the moment is my face. I feel like especially from the right side I look so ugly. I hate speaking to people if they’re on my right side and sometimes ask to switch places so they’ll be looking at my left. So this is my life and sometimes I feel like I can manage it and deal with it but other times I get really emotional about it and triggered. I’ve been dating someone for a while and we’ve said we love each other but now this is coming between us. Recently (before lockdown) I was hanging out with him and his friends and I’m still getting to know them and I had a few drinks and suddenly started to get paranoid thinking they all thought I was hideous and ugly. I didn’t say anything to them but I did become quite quiet as I was contemplating everything. Then I started to compare myself to my guy’s ex (they’re still friends but she isn’t the most attractive person ever and before I would never have felt threatened by her). When we went to bed he asked if I was OK a few times because he could sense something was on my mind. I really tried to keep it to myself because I know it’s my issue but I just broke down crying and told him I feel he’s too good for me because I’m ugly and fat and don’t have a good personality etc. And how I feel like no one likes me and can see that I look disfigured from the one side. How I feel like I’ll never compare to his ex and whatever. He was quite shocked I think, and taken aback. He always says I’m out of his league but this time he said it’s not about leagues, we’re both attracted to eachother and love eachother and that’s all that matters. Whilst I agree, and I don’t go for looks in someone else (I literally am just so obsessed with my own and comparing to other girls, I’m not shallow in terms of who I’m with if that makes sense?) I’m just finding it so hard to actually believe that he wants me. Like I really love him and really see a future with him but NOW I’m so preoccupied thinking he doesn’t really want me that I’m considering breaking up to protect myself. I do have abandonment issues and an anxious attachment style and that probably does play into it. I hate that I told him how I was feeling. I wish I managed to hide my feelings because now he knows my weakness and also how fucking crazy I am. I’m terrified of having that used against me or being manipulated (past experiences). I know we should be equal but I kinda feel like I’ve given him power now (this is in my head, he hasn’t done anything to make me think he’s going to use it) and my instinct is to try and get the upper hand or run. To add insult to injury, I’ve technically had a lot of sex in my life but I’ve only really had long term relationships and a few one night stands, so whilst it’s a lot it hasn’t been with many people. He, on the other hand, has slept with A LOT of girls. Big, small, tall, short, a lot of different types of girls. I’m struggling to let go and embrace everything because I always want to be the best. The prettiest. The funniest. The cutest. The best at anything. I’m so upset thinking he’s with me when before he might’ve been with someone so much better or hotter etc. And I really don’t want to open up about all of this with him. It’s my problem and I know he finds confidence really attractive and I’ve already shown myself to be super insecure now and I’m not really sure how I can change that. When we watch films he’ll say ‘Scarlett johanson is so hot’ or ‘Lady Gaga is stunning’ and it really bothers me but I know it’s irrational because 2 minutes before I was probably saying how hot Jason Momoa is and that means nothing to me. I’ve become really defensive and overthinking every little thing and I feel like a prisoner in my own head. Isolation isn’t making it any better because I’m alone with my own thoughts. I understand people are going to suggest that I need to be on my own for a while, I have been and it didn’t help. I don’t want to give this relationship up, I feel like we could have something amazing if I can just get over my depression, anxiety and negative thinking. I don’t know what I’m after by posting. Just any advice on how to ACTUALLY love yourself and learn to believe that someone is with you because they want to be with you would be really useful. Just anything please. Tl;dr: I think I’m really weird looking and people hate me and don’t like me because of it and are always secretly judging me. I think my partner doesn’t really want to be with me and would rather be with someone else and is just settling etc.
2019.07.28 23:57 eurghurghTERFS are right- I am a woman after all!!!!!
A TERF was telling me today that I'm not transgender like I thought I was- I'm actually just a butch lesbian. I realized that she was right, and I was just a fool all along. Gone are the days of wishing I was someone's boyfriend, because I'm a lesbian now. I no longer want to date men anymore. I don't daydream about Chris Hemsworth's muscles because now I spend all my time wishing I was dating Scarlett Johanson (but then the TERF told me she was a fake feminist, because she wanted to play a TiF in some movie). Turns out that wanting to date men was a side effect of the patriarchy all along!!! Woman are so much better than strong, tall, handsome, muscular men. I want to date women instead of going to a gay bar and picking up gorgeous gay men. Men are just violent creatures that oppress women, and not extremely attractive potential partners with cute laughs and nice eyes and strong calves. I'm so glad a TERF was able to turn this gay faggot into a lovely butch lesbian!!!! Now if you'll excuse me, I have a double date with a lesbian and her super hot brother and his wife.
2018.08.20 23:57 dogfishtigerTell Me What You Want by Justin Lehmiller - book review/summary
Hi all, long time lurker. I hope this post is useful. I really enjoyed Justin Lehmiller's book Tell Me What You Want: The Science of Sexual Desire and How It Can Help You Improve Your Sex Life. I highly recommend it - it has the right balance of being interesting and useful. In the past few years I've read some excellent books about sexuality. These include Come As You Are by Emily Nagoski, She Comes First by Ian Kermer, Sexual Intelligence by Marty Klein, and Mating in Captivity by Esther Perel. They've all been terrific, and in combination have altered the way I've thought about sexuality and relationships. In fact, they'd all in one way or another qualify as "quake books" - books that have shaken my foundations and rattled my brain. In this same sense, Tell Me What You Want is a quake book. What I took away from the book I'm tempted to say that one of the things that I took away from Lehmiller's book is the importance of communication with your partner. But I don't think it's just that. The other books I've mentioned share this similar message. Sexual Intelligence is especially good at talking about this - and explaining how effective communication is both a technical and emotional skill. (In the same way that public speaking is both technical and emotional - first, you have to get over your own nerves and be able to have some degree of control when you're in front of a group of people. But after that, there are definitely techniques and ways of communicating your ideas that are more effective than others.) I think the key thing I took away from Lehmiller's book is an insight into what other people think. It has created a context for me to discuss some of the topics in this book, that I otherwise might have had trouble with. It also legitimised certain types of desires. I know that being "normal" isn't the name of the game when it comes to sexuality, and focusing on what is "normal" is something you actually want to avoid. (Come As You Are is excellent on this point.) But reading about other people's desires gave me a sense of permission to explore ideas that I might otherwise have kept in the attic of my subconscious. It also made me realise that some of the desires I've entertained, or kept at bay, aren't nearly as unusual as I thought. Case in point: 89% of respondents reported having fantasised about threesomes. 74% had fantasised about orgies. These figures include men and women. This isn't a book about titillation - it's valuable for improving relationships Lehmiller has clearly been working in the field of sexual behaviour for a long time. He packs some wisdom into what could be a book written simply for titillation. For example, he makes the profound point that it's "an odd state of affairs in which Americans find it more challenging to talk about sex (even with their own spouse or partner) than to actually have it". A common theme that he returns to, is that sharing fantasies with your significant other is an opportunity to strengthen mutual trust and intimacy. It's also a way to improve self-esteem and expand your sense of self. Sharing fantasies with your partner For example, he reports on people who shared their favourite fantasies of all time with their partners, compared to people who had not. The people who had shared their fantasies had "the most satisfying sex lives, the happiest relationships, and the fewest difficulties with sexual desire/arousal/orgasm". Of those people who shared their fantasies, he noted that negative reactions were uncommon. The vast majority had received a favourable or neutral reaction from their partner. Of those fantasies that involved novelty, romance, or BDSM, between 74% and 82% of reactions were positive. Of those fantasies that involved taboos, group sex, and/or non-monogamy, 59% to 65% of reactions were positive. Non-monogamy fantasies had the most reports of negative reactions, but this was only for 22% of respondents who shared these fantasies. Sexual fantasy = sexual desire??? Interestingly, Lehmiller's research indicated that 79% of those surveyed hope to eventually act on their favourite sexual fantasy. Of the 21% who didn't, there were often practical reasons they didn't want to do this. For example, the fantasy might have been impossible (if it included a superhero or gender-bending, for instance) or it might be the sort of fantasy that could get someone in trouble with legal or moral authorities. This finding was interesting to me. I've historically brought into the distinction between sexual fantasy and desire. You can fantasise about something, but it doesn't mean you want to do it. This could be a definitional thing, or something to do with the methodology of Lehmiller's survey. Or I could be mistaken - perhaps the distinction between fantasy and desire (as I define it) isn't quite as strong as I'd thought. That's something for me to mull on. Anyway. Despite 79% of participants wanting to eventually act on their favourite sexual fantasy, less than one third of them had done so. That's quite a big gulf. Acting on a fantasy tends to be a positive experience The figures above are interesting, and even more interesting in light of Lehmiller's findings from those who had acted out their fantasies. A vast majority (86%) said doing so was not just neutral, but met or exceeded expectations. 91% said that it had a neutral to positive impact on their relationship. It was only a very small subset of people for whom it was negative to the relationship. One finding that struck me was that 92% of non-monogamy fantasies met or exceeded expectations. Lehmiller adds that "studies have found that monogamous and consensually non-monogamous relationships are actually very similar when it comes to relationship quality: non-monogamous partners tend to be just as satisfied and aren't any more likely to break up". I'll come back to that one. (On this note: for many people, the fantasy of their partner having a sexual relationship with someone else was more of a turn-on than doing so themselves. In fact, 58% of men had fantasised about cuckolding - and more than a quarter of men fantasised about it often. Also, age was a key variable linked to an interest in non-monogamy, group sex, threesomes, taboo acts, and novelty. These sorts of interests were more common in older people, especially those in long-term, secure relationships.) Another finding, which I'd come across before but made more sense in this context, was that there is some research indicating that people who practice BDSM are just as psychologically healthy as the rest of the population - and may even be more so. These people "reported higher self-esteem, less guilt and shame, [and] better psychological adjustment". Lehmiller acknowledges that "there's quite probably a bidirectional association here: being in a happy relationship probably predisposes people to better fantasy experiences". My guess is that people who act out fantasies also have decent communication skills and a strong sense of trust and security in the relationship, which impacted the outcomes from these experiences. Practical suggestions for acting out fantasies He also provides some practical suggestions in terms of acting out fantasies:
"Tell each other what you want. Talk about your own and your partner's sexual desires in great detail, as well as your limits and boundaries, before taking any action."
"[T]ry to turn your fantasy into your partner's fantasy before acting it out. This means working carefully to address [their] fears and concerns and reducing their uncertainty".
Simple, but not easy? Some comments on BDSM (A quick reminder: BDSM is a weird acronym, because it's a 4-letter acronym covering three pairs of words: bondage-and-discipline; dominance-and-submission; and sadism-and-masochism. There may be some overlap between the three pairs, but in some ways they're quite distinct.) 96% of women had had BDSM fantasies, compared to 93% of men. Of these, women have more BDSM fantasies of almost every type than men. Women are twice as likely to be into bondage than men and four times more likely to be into masochism. Bondage was an extremely common fantasy (more than three quarters of women). But submission was also very common. Lehmiller provides a useful explanation relating to how discipline differs from bondage: whereas bondage is about physical restraint, discipline is about psychological constraint. It's "all about controlling someone else's behaviours - what they're allowed to do or say - through rules and punishment". "In some ways, then, discipline can be thought as surrendering both body and mind to another". He does an excellent job of explaining some of the psychology behind the appeal of BDSM - at least for many people. The psychology of BDSM fits in with several other findings, specific to BDSM and more broadly. For example, more people would prefer to give up control than to take control during sex (including men). (Submission fantasies, for example, "were fundamentally about giving oneself over completely to another person to be used for that person's pleasure". They were about changing from a person into an object.) People are more likely to fantasise about getting pain (mild pain!) rather than giving pain. Ultimately, the appeal of BDSM appears to be about escaping from self-awareness, and focusing on immediate sensations. It's another channel for achieving a sort of mindfulness, or focusing of attention to heighten experience and intensity. BDSM, in its many forms, can take us out of our head and distract us from our hangups and anxieties. It's about bringing us into the moment. Consensual non-monogamy It was ten times more likely for people to fantasise about consensual non-monogamy than non-consensual monogamy - ie, cheating or infidelity. And as I've mentioned earlier, 92% of people who had acted on non-monogamy fantasies said the experience met or exceeded expectations. I'm not sure what to make of that. I'd like to think I'm a good Bayesian and update my beliefs to reflect the evidence I'm presented with. But there's something that doesn't ring true to me here. I think it has something to do with the sample from which Lehmiller's findings were derived. Although it was a large sample and data-set (over 4,000 people completing a survey consisting of hundreds of questions), he's the first to admit that the data is based on a non-representative sample of US residents. Given the nature of the topic, he appeared to have quite a diverse range of respondents - in terms of age, location (there were respondents from every US state), political stripes, and religious beliefs. Lehmiller doesn't talk much about specifics in the book - such as whether and to what extent religious people, older people, and Republicans were represented, but only in the sense that they were outliers. Nor does he talk in much detail about where he found people to respond to the survey. (He wasn't being dishonest by not going into detail: I think he provided about the right amount of information for a book for the general public.) My impression is that he found people by approaching online and real-life communities where frank discussion of sex was a central norm. I suspect the respondents were likely to be a uniquely sex-positive bunch of people compared to the general population. Part of me thinks this puts the findings under a serious cloud. But another part of me thinks that this is a natural constraint of trying to research an area like sexual fantasy, and shouldn't stop us from trying to follow these lines of inquiry. I also think that if Lehmiller had put the call out today, I'd have heard of it, and if I'd been eligible to respond, I'd have done so. In which case, the population may not be representative of the US or the world in general. But it's probably more representative than me, than a more broadly "representative" sample. In which case, it's perhaps more interesting for me. In much the same way that I'd find the median income far less interesting than the median income for someone my age and with my level of education. It's a more accurate point of comparison than the more general statistic. Which really makes me wonder. I've historically thought of monogamy as a non-negotiable. Anything outside of this box is a no-go, and likely to be a complete disaster. To what extent would I update my beliefs to reflect this sort of finding? I just can't get away from thinking about the sample. 92% of people saying the experience met or exceeded expectations sounds like a really high proportion. But not everyone from the 4,000+ respondents to the survey ended up acting out a non-monogamy fantasy. If this was a major fantasy and less than one third of respondents had acted out their major fantasy, the sample size reduces to about 1,300 maximum. If it related 1,300 people, that would mean over 100 people are saying that the experience was neutral or worse. But not everyone of this pool would have fantasised and been into non-monogamy. You can actually get 92% from asking 25 people, with 23 of those 25 people saying the experience met or exceeded expectations. I'm not sure what to make of it. It hasn't reversed my perspective about monogamy. But it raises interesting questions for thought and discussion, especially in conjunction with other articles and books, including Esther Perel's Mating in Captivity. It also reminds me of the excerpt I quoted earlier: it's "an odd state of affairs in which Americans find it more challenging to talk about sex (even with their own spouse or partner) than to actually have it". I suspect most couples are more likely to experience actual infidelity than to have a robust conversation about the topic of consensual non-monogamy, especially where monogamy has been assumed by both people. Lehmiller points out on potential theory for why the experience was so positive to such a large proportion of people. He talks about self-expansion theory in psychology: "humans have a need to continually grow and expand the self in order to be satisfied with their lives. We can meet this need by having new experiences, learning new things, and developing new relationships." Sexual orientation versus sexual flexibility Lehmiller made a distinction I hadn't come across before: between sexual orientation and sexual flexibility. In short, sexual orientation refers to a biological disposition to desiring women, men, both, neither, or some combination in between. Sexual flexibility relates to a willingness to try new things and deviate from sexual norms generally. This includes a willingness to deviate from sexual orientation, not to mention what culture or society has told us we should want. Women tend to be more sexually flexible than men, and this is largely unrelated to age. With men, however, sexual flexibility tends to increase with age. Some tidbits: Before I conclude by talking about pornography and sexual education, I want to share a few of the interesting tidbits from the book.
The most common public places where people fantasised about having sex: the office, public toilets, lifts, bars, changing rooms, and parks.
Lycra is a common fabric for fetishes.
Many of the questions in Lehmiller's survey asked about three distinct factors: what the act was; who was involved in the act; and the location of the act. Although the importance of the factors varied, in most cases it was the act itself that was most important.
Lehmiller points to research indicating that rates of infidelity for men have stayed stable since 1970. For women, however, they've increased about 40%. (Although I'm sure it's difficult to get accurate data on this one.)
Women are more likely than men to be the focus of their fantasy. In other words, they're more likely to be objects, and acted on by others, in their fantasies. Men are more likely to have fantasies where they're acting on the object of the desire.
Women often fantasise about being sexually irresistible. Men do too, but not to the same degree.
If you want to simulate semen in the kitchen, mix 7 ml of room temperature water with 7.16gm of cornflour and stir for 5 minutes. Voila!
A surprisingly small number of people regularly fantasise about celebrities. People are far more likely to fantasise about their partners. To the extent people fantasised about celebrities, straight women fantasised about Channing Tatum, Ryan Gosling, and Adam Levine. Straight men fantasised about Scarlett Johanson, Jennifer Aniston, and Jennifer Lawrence. Gay and bisexual men fantasised about Zac Efron, Jack Gyllenhall, and Channing Tatum. And the superhero straight women most fantasised about - by a long way - was Batman.
Men are twice as likely to fantasise about brunettes than blondes.
Women and men are less likely to fantasise about being on top, and more likely to fantasise about being on bottom.
It's not uncommon for men to fantasise about being younger than they currently are. It's pretty uncommon for woman to fantasise about being younger.
Contrary to popular opinion, whether people fantasise about being dominant or submissive tends to be positively correlated to the level of dominance and submission they have in their ordinary lives. There are always exceptions, but the high-powered businessman or businesswoman is more likely to identify as a "dom" than a "sub". Having said this, men were more likely to fantasise about being submissive than dominant.
Read the book! There's something new on every page. Pornography and sexual education. Some of Lehmiller's closing comments in the book relate to pornography and sexual education. Rather than paraphrase, I'll quote him directly instead:
"The problem with porn is when it ends up serving as a substitute for sex education"
"Porn is really only dangerous in the absence of accurate sexual knowledge. We need that knowledge to appropriately contextualise what we're seeing on screen."
"Don't waste your time and energy fighting the porn industry - fight against poor sex education instead."
If we didn't have good sexual education in school or at home, or were inculcated with conflicting and frankly bizarre messages from our popular culture, reading Tell Me What You Want is a worthwhile exercise. I've only scratched the surface, and I highly recommend it. If you're looking to improve your personal education about sex, I highly recommend this book. I'm not sure whether I'd recommend this book as the first book you read. My inclination is probably Sexual Intelligence by Marty Klein or Come As You Are by Emily Nagosaki. But in conjunction with these books, as well as others like She Comes First and Mating in Captivity, this book will make a big difference in how you understand sex. With any luck, it will significantly improve your sex life. At the very least, it will probably improve your fantasy life ;-)
2017.03.06 23:53 RaygunnerReiWhy I'm Not Going To See Ghost In The Shell 2017
I'm a fan of the Ghost In The Shell Franchise. But I wouldn't really consider myself a 'big' fan of the series. On the totem pole of anime franchises I genuinely love, Ghost In The Shell isn't that close to top. I got into the GITS franchise through a DVD copy of the original movie from my local Barnes and Noble, while I did enjoy it I was a bit too young to truly appreciate it. I didn't really come to be a real fan the franchise until I watched ARISE (a kind've but not really prequel to SAC and the movies), and then the GITS:Stand Alone Complex series. I say this because I want you to understand where I come from, and that this isn't necessarily me being a weeb who disagrees with a western studio touching my baby. I like the series, but I'm not one of the ultra defensive types who wants to be inherently biased against an Anime To live action movie. I think it is possible a live action adaptation of Ghost In The Shell could be good, or even great. But from what I've seen, and the greater Zeitgeist and context surrounding the movie I've decided against going to see it. Here is my reasoning. 1) The Abysmal Track Record For Anime/Manga To Live Action Adaptations: Hollywood doesn't exactly have a good track record when it comes to adapting Anime to live action film. From the Wachoskis seizure-inducing take on Speed Racer, to the so-bad-it's-good adaption of The Guyver, to the largely unknown live action Fist Of The North Star, to the 'meh' Astro Boy CGI cartoon, to the universally reviled garbage fires of Dragon Ball Evolution, and Last Airbender (okay technically not an anime, but the same principle applies). They're all fundamentally flawed on the same level. Each one proved Hollywood producers and executives simply do not understand why the original source materials were great, how to adapt the stories and characters properly, nor how to overcome the hurdles with translating the Anime or Manga medium to Live action. There has been only one adaptation of a Manga to live action by a Hollywood Studio that has had any sort of commercial success. . . . EDGE OF TOMORROW, and even it had most of the same issues facing this GITS remake. It only succeeded because it distanced itself from it's source material and marketed itself as it's own IP. It changed the themes of the original story to appeal to a mass market, altered the designs of the alien invaders from the creepy geometric designs in the manga into generic bug monsters, altered the ages, genders and ethnic backgrounds of the entire cast, and changed the ending from the bittersweet, poignant and philosophical, into a Hollywood happy ending. While good for what the movie was going for, it ran completely antithetical to what the original story stood for. As I watched it I wondered, why did they even bother licensing the Manga if they weren't going to acknowledge anything about the Manga aside from the time travel aspect? The advertisement didn't even acknowledge the source material. But Unlike Edge Of Tomorrow. This GITS film isn't Marketing itself as it's own IP, and it just looks to be in an awkward place. On one hand, it clearly wants to appeal to fans of the property (hence the shots taken right out of the original movie) on the other hand it's changing so much from the original property to appeal to a mass audience that it will likely only alienate said fans, and leave the normies who don't get the references confused. Bottom line the trend of Hollywood failing to produce a decent Live Action Anime movie is a long established issue, and I don't expect that to change with Ghost In The Shell. 2) The Whitewashing Alright, let’s get this out of the way towards the beginning because I'm sick and tired of talking about it. Look, I understand WHY the Studio cast a marketable actress like Scarlett Johansson as the Major. But that still doesn't mean it DIDN'T screw an Asian American actor out of a potential breakout role as Major Kusanagi. Asian-American actors simply don't have as many opportunities for roles as characters that are powerful, intelligent, competent, and sexy like the Major is. Let alone as LEADS in a tent-pole blockbuster. The few roles like that they do have are ALWAYS either outright whitewashed, or outsourced to Chinese Actors to appeal to the Foreign Market. But the difference is when a white actor or actress doesn't get a lead role, he or she still has hundreds of more roles to audition for that give them a chance to showcase humanity, and has a chance of getting them. When an Asian American actor doesn't get a role that they could perfectly fill, they don't have any other roles to fall back on due to simple demographics. It's gotten so bad, many Asian American actors are outright leaving the US for Hong Kong, China, Taiwan, Korea, and Japan simply so they can play a role that ISN'T a sidekick to a white lead or a terrible stereotype. Cartoonist Gene Yang when talking about the Last Airbender controversy said it best. "Asian actors are simply seen as inadequate (by movie studios) for American audiences, even in movies that so obviously celebrate our culture." Bottom line, I'm for opening opportunities for Asian actors, and all this did was take not just one, but SEVERAL opportunities away. There was no reason they couldn't have cast an Asian actor as Batou to be Kusanagis partner. The two main characters of the film, the Major and Batou are being played by white actors. Meanwhile the Asian actors are once again, reduced to supporting roles to the white lead, just like so many other movies before it. If this movie is a hit, it will only continue that trend, and keep screwing over Asian American actors in Hollywood productions for years to come. That's not the only issue here. If the studio absolutely HAS to whitewash the role, could they at least have tried not to draw attention to the fact that Scarlett Johanson is playing an ASIAN woman wearing a white girl body? Like maybe don't cast an ethnically Japanese actress to play her biological mother? I'm not even joking. Another thing that bugs me, if Paramount and Dreamworks were going to cast a white actress as the lead character, then why keep the setting of the movie in Japan at all? If you're going to cast white actors to play the two main leads anyways, why not go the extra mile and just localize the whole thing in an American/European setting like they did with Edge of Tomorrow and the upcoming Netflix Death Note series? At least that way you'd have a semi-acceptable excuse for the whitewashing, and it wouldn't just be for naked exploitative marketing. 4) A Clichéd Story And Character: I know a trailer is not necessarily representative of the whole movie. But the whole 'you had a family' and 'your life was stolen from you' makes me worry we're just going to get a rehash of Robocop, instead of a story that does the original property justice. The original Ghost in the Shell was not a story about an Amnesiac rediscovering her past, this version of the Major isn't at all like the character in the movies or shows. The major is a character that by the time the audience is introduced to her has made peace with her past, and moves forward. In all versions we never get to know much about her past, (with the exception of a few minor details in ARISE). We're introduced to the character as is. She's no-nonsense and harsh during missions, but she also knows when to lighten up and be gentle. She's an insane mad hacker, but she's also a very down to earth person who cares for others. She's upbeat and has a ton of fun when she's around her teammates, but she also can have an existential crisis at the drop of a hat. Will Scarjo's Major really be able to capture all that? Given what we know about the plot and the character so far, I highly doubt it. As for the plot of the movie itself? GITS was a story about rediscovering personal identity yes, but it was also about big minded existentialist themes. Like the nihilistic implications of transhumanism, how advanced AI would impact theology, commerce, and nationalism, and the inherently dehumanizing nature of technology. It compares digitizing your mind and becoming a machine to the Buddhist ideal of transcending human existence and entering Nirvana, and that's just scratching the surface of the philosophical density of the franchise. Every incarnation of GITS has at least commented somewhat on these themes and ideals, (even ARISE). The original GITS was about identity and self in an era where your mind can be flawlessly duplicated and uploaded into a computer. Innocence talked about how people would abuse that technology to exploit and dehumanize others. Stand Alone Complex and 2nd GIG had a main plot about exposing corporate corruption, but it made commentary on the psychological impact advances in technology and AI will have on people and society. Judging from the advertising, it just doesn't look like it's going to have any of those deeper philosophical themes in it. Because that in the eyes of the Hollywood elites belief that it would alienate the movie going American audience. It's just going to be Lucy again, or that Robocop remake. 5) Lack Of An R Rating : Admittedly, the original Manga was a lot more explicit with some of it's content than the Films and the TV shows that came afterwards. Mamoru Oshii, the director of the first movie and Innocence made the (in my opinion) wise decision to downplay some of the more explicit elements in the Manga (such as the Major being a VR Porn Addict ). But make no mistake, if any incarnation of GITS had been a live action it would be rated R. The Original movies and ARISE have graphic nudity (the Major is shown topless several times). Extreme violence, both human and cybernetic Batou in Innocence graphically ripped a man’s arm off with beautiful details of blood and gore everywhere. Also Innocence, Stand Alone Complex, 2nd Gig, deal with heavy plot elements such as Human Sex Trafficking, Drug Abuse, Terrorism, and Religious Extremism. Anyone of which would be more than enough to be worthy of an R-Rating in a live action American adaptation. Or at least be enough to give a modern studio executive pause. That’s in addition to the way the movie looks. It’s pretty, which is the exact opposite of what GITS is meant to be. The original GITS was not a pretty movie, it wasn't a clean movie, and it was not intended for a mass audience. It had more in common with the grungy, R-Rated action movies of the 80's like the Terminator and Blade Runner, which were visions of the filmmakers behind them, and had a very specific market in mind when creating them. Which were full of raw creative passion and sex appeal. As opposed to the modern day clean, mass market, generally sexless appeal of thriller movies of Jason Bourne, Mission Impossible, or Superhero movies. 6) The Potential Fallout: I really don’t want this movie to succeed. I know that makes me sound like a total judgmental jerk. But I want to make it clear, this movie being a financial hit will likely be the worst thing that could ever happen to American anime fans, and fans of genre properties in general. Why? Well aside from the Whitewashing, aside from the naked appeal to the broad market, the biggest reason I'm not going to see this live action GITS movie though is the potential fallout it could have on the properties we love if it succeeds. Make no mistake, there is no such thing as nuance in Hollywood. Hollywood is infamous for chasing trends hoping to make money off of it, and butchering source material in the mad rush to catch that trend before it ends. Hollywood executives know the Superhero movie bubble is going to pop eventually. It may not happen for years, but they know they have to be prepared for when that happens. So they're turning to the mostly untapped well of Japanese IPs for their next big box office hit. There are a cubic buttload of Anime adaptations in Hollywood development hell, because every producer and studio executive in charge has been worried about if they could carry a Market and make money. If the live action GITS is a success. It will prove to them that an Anime adaptation can make money, but it will also send the message that 'We don't have to get the material right, we can produce these movies without respecting the spirit or themes in the source material and still make bank." I don't like the Idea of seeing these stories and characters, GREAT stories and characters that have influenced, entertained, and inspired people around the world for decades to be strip mined of what made them great just to appeal to an American Audience that the Hollywood elites have nothing but disdain for. Here are some examples. The American Live Action Evangelion movie has been in development hell for DECADES, with everyone from Steven Spielberg, to Peter Jackson being connected, to even rumors of Michael Bay being interested at one point (just rumors, thank god). Paramount is honestly considering optioning a live action trilogy of Naruto films, there was news about WB optioning a live action American adaptations of Bleach, Full Metal Alchemist, and Attack On Titan movies. Speaking of WB, the Akira Remake is INFAMOUS for having been greenlit and shut down three separate times due to a combination of pre-production issues, fan pushback against Leonardo Dicaprio being considered for the lead role, and the hesitance on the part of WB executives. If the GITS movie is a success, ALL of these projects will be back on the table. Which will mean we'll likely have to suffer through MORE passable at best to outright horrible Anime adaptations. Look, part of me wants to be optimistic. It took a decade of bad Superhero movies like Spawn, Batman And Robin, and Steel, before we got Sam Raimi's Spider-Man, The Marvel movies, and the Dark Knight Trilogy. Maybe through all this, there could be a gem in the dross. Maybe we could get an anime adaptation by an American studio that respects the source material, isn’t whitewashed of its Japanese origins, and turns a box office profit. But I'd rather not live through a decade of bad adaptations of source material I love. Just on the off chance I’d get a good adaptation in a decade or two.
2016.06.16 14:47 making_new_friendsMe [30 F] with my friend [34 M] of 2 years, will NOT accept that I do not want to date his friend.
I'm fudging details because those involved are redditors. I becoming very annoyed here and need some advice. I moved to a city and met a friend "Eric" who was gracious enough to bring me into his social group and help me meet new people. I have been in this city for 2 years, I travel often for work, and have had a really hard time meeting anyone local....new girlfriends and men alike. I let Eric know this after we'd gotten to know each other a bit, because I felt that people can't help you if you don't ask. I'm a pretty cool person and have never had trouble building and maintaining relationships with the right people. So it's really been about opportunity to meet new girlfriends. Romantically, is a whole other issue. I've been involved in a few abusive relationships, physically, emotionally, and financially. Well, Eric decides he has his best friend who would LOVE me. He tells his friend I look like scarlett johanson and sent him pictures of me. He talked me up so much to his friend, and all the while I just cringed. He literally did it right in front of me. He noticed my face and said I should just be open to possibilities. Now I was immediately uninterested in meeting this friend because I'd just met Eric, and really just wanted to build some platonic friendships. Throwing in blind set ups was just a bad idea. This was before Eric described his friend to me. I model for a living, so I work out a lot and have to stay in shape most of the year, and I'm 5'8'' barefoot. I also own my own tech company that's been quite successful. I will be leaving the modeling industry to run it full time, soon. In a man I prefer someone fit, who has a runner's build, and at least 5'8''. That's my sweet spot. I NEVER get hit on by men who meet that description. I'm constantly hit on by men who are pushing 5'5'' and I''ll never understand it. However, I digress, Eric told me his friend was super sweet but was unlucky in love because of his weight (he's about 300lbs). Eric said that he thought I would be great for his friend because I was beautiful, ambitious, and could help him lose weight. At this point I just really felt like nothing I wanted was being taken into consideration. 1.) I had already told him I didn't want to be set up and 2.)He never asked me what types of men I was attracted to, to know that I would not be attracted to his friend. It was all about what I could offer his friend who I had no interest in dating and consistently made very clear. Once again I was being asked to bring everything to the table in exchange for some male companionship. I could be his friend's ambitious "scarlett johanson" with the great personality (Eric's words) AND help him get into shape. We all got together as a group and went out, it was a great time. Eric's girlfriend was super sweet and also a model so I chatted with her more. Eric's friend was there and he's genuinely an amazing person. He's very nice, and I'm sorry he's had issues with dating because of his weight but I'm just not attracted to him. Eric won't let it go, he makes comments about me "keeping an open mind" etc. Here's my thing, I am TIRED of entering into relationships with men and overlooking important things such as looks. I feel like women are constantly asked to do this and I'm sick of it. In the past I'd done it on my own, just thinking I could get past not being attracted to them. The men who abused me were all very nice at first, and because of that I looked past not being attracted to them because they offered companionship and seemed "kind." NO, attraction is important, and newsflash there are plenty of not conventionally attractive men who are insane a-holes. The men I've dated in the past have not been my type, but because they pursued me I thought that meant they were genuinely interested in me and not what I have to offer. I don't know where society got the idea that men who are overlooked because of looks automatically have hearts of gold. I shouldn't have to compromise on attraction, just to meet a decent romantic partner, no one should. I'm not looking for George Clooney for goodness sake. I'm pissed that Eric sees what all I could potentially bring to the table for his friend, in exchange for his friend's kindness. Why does he only see me as being good enough to be a "fixer" for his friend? Telling me to keep an open mind? I'm not asking anyone to come to the table and fix me and my issues. I get that Eric is coming from a loving place for his friend, but it's not a fair place for me. The problem is, I really like all these people AS FRIENDS, but if Eric keeps this up his friend's feelings are going to get hurt and I'm afraid I'll get kicked out of the group. It's taken me so long to meet people I connect with here, and this is what happens? How do I make Eric back off AND keep these friends? HELP! EDIT: Formatting and grammar - sorry guys. tl;dr: Mandatory summary/question! My friend is trying to set me up with his best friend, despite my disinterest. It's awkward, and wouldn't need to be if he would just let it go.
2014.02.07 04:30 MangoBitchI have an interview for an internship tomorrow and I wish I didn't
I should be happy. It's a paid engineering internship. Not exactly in my favorite part of the country, but it's not too bad. Money is good, especially for someone like me who has never had any significant disposable income. But I know they're not going to hire me. I'm currently taking the semester off, and at some point we'll have to talk about that. In the future I could explain it by saying "medical reasons,'" which is true enough, but if I'm sitting right there, perfectly healthy looking, they'll just think I'm lying. Old me would find some way to spin it or gloss over it to make it sound like a good thing. Current me is just tired and feels sick thinking about it. And to make matters worse, I read some comment on that Scarlett Johanson without makeup thread about how a professional without makeup is like showing up to work in shorts. I know shit about makeup. I don't even know how to put on eyeliner and make it look right. I try different colors of eye shadow and lipstick, but I don't even know what looks good or not. I could look up tutorials, but everyone's face is different and I don't know how to figure this shit out when I feel like I'm lacking a basic sense of aesthetics when it comes to myself. And even if I could, that shit's expensive. So I'm stuck being ugly and unprofessional. If I don't feel worthy of being hired, no one is going to hire me. It doesn't matter how much time and effort I've put into my degree for the past three years... I'm weak and falling apart now. And I don't know how to hide it when my entire mind and body are saturated in self-loathing and hopelessness. I hate this city. I hate being here. Going to campus triggers me because of all the fucking stress I've experienced there. Going to the part of the city with the bars and restaurants triggers my anxiety because my abusive ex lives in that area. And my entire friend group and support network has fallen apart, partially because of my ex. There's nothing in this city but shitty memories. I want to leave. The plan was to spend the semester with my partner (who lives a ways away) and to just take some time to recover before coming back. But he's really busy and I'm fucked up, so arranging a move across the country isn't exactly easy. The plan was to be out there next weekend. That's not happening and I don't know when it will. I feel so trapped. I can't get out of this city. I can't get meaningful employment. I can't even make my brain function fucking correctly.
Scarlett Johansson’s Newly Engaged! Here’s a Look Back at ...
Scarlett Johansson Family Pictures Father, Mother, Brother, Sister, Spouse & Daughter!!!
Brie Larson & Scarlett Johansson on First Kisses, Fan ...
An 'anatomically correct' Scarlett Johansson robot - YouTube
#ScarJoNONO- A TRANSGENDER MAN'S PERSPECTIVE- SCARLETT JOHANSSON
Scarlett Johansson Can't Unsee This Picture of Her ...
Scarlett Johansson on Colin Jost's Romantic Proposal - YouTube
Sandra Bullock locks lips with Scarlett Johansson - YouTube
The Real Reason Scarlett Divorced Ryan Reynolds - YouTube
A Big Surprise for Scarlett Johansson - YouTube
Nur ein Partner? Nein danke! Scarlett Johansson hält nichts von Monogamie
Ricky Ma has no formal training in robotics. He spent three years and $50,000 building a robotic Scarlett Johansson. Ricky is a graphic designer from Hong Ko... If you're new, Subscribe! → http://bit.ly/Subscribe-to-Nicki-Swift Remember when Ryan Reynolds was married to Scarlett Johansson for a blink of an eye? We al... Brie Larson admitted to Ellen she doesn’t remember her first kiss, while her “Avengers: Endgame” co-star Scarlett revealed she made an active choice to have ... Sandra Bullock kisses Scarlett Johansson after winning a career achievement gong at the MTV Movie Awards. Ellen showed Scarlett Johansson an old photo of her 'SNL' star boyfriend Colin Jost, and now the 'Avengers' star can't unsee it. Plus, Scarlett talks the pos... This is the low down on the whole Scarlett Johansson 'Rub & Tug' role where she will be portraying Transgender Man Dante Gill, Produced by Rupert Sanders. Personally- there is a lot more to talk ... American actress, model and singer Scarlett Johansson Family With Father, Mother, Brother, Sister, Spouse & Daughter Pictures 2018 [HD] Scarlett Johansson Family: Father: Karsten Johansson Mother ... Scarlett Johansson opened up to Ellen about her fiancé Colin Jost's 'romantic' and 'James Bond'-esque proposal. She then told Ellen about her new film, 'Jojo... How do you surprise an Avenger? With another Avenger! Check out Ellen's big scare with Chris Evans! #ScarlettJohansson #ChrisEvans #Avengers Während Medien über eine Trennung von ihrem Ehemann Romain Dauriac spekulieren, spricht Scarlett Johansson im Interview mit dem „Playboy“ darüber, was sie von Monogamie hält. Warum die 32 ...